|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
liveinkorea316
Joined: 20 Aug 2010
Location: South Korea
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 2:41 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Public school's reason for being has always been in large part to keep students busy while their parents work. This goes to the beginnings of Public schools and why they were introduced in the place of perfectly well-functioning private and religious schools in the West 150 years ago.
Secondly, the other main reason for public school has been egalitarianism - that all children should have an equal education, at least to basic level.
So with one of the main goals being babysitting why are you surprised that your job ends up doing just that?
There are other jobs in Korea too. While many hagwons are also for babysitting purposes, many aren't. There are many adult Hagwons where you teach high school and college students.
Teaching at a university, you will find there are many challenges to your teaching ability from talented students and extra classes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The point I guess is that it wouldn't have to be babysitting.
They could easily
allow the NET's to do the job they were hired for if they wanted to.
Here's an example of what I mean;
The textbooks that I used came with CD roms, a teacher's guide (in Korean)
various resources (like picture cards, word cards, charts masks etc.)
Most of the schools limited the teacher to just using the books, even if it was pointed out that there were other resources that were intended to be part of the lessons, they refused to give the resources to the teachers.
They told teachers to make their own.
Even though they had the resources at the school, they wouldn't allow teachers to use them.
The teacher's manual is all in Korean, there was supposed to be an on-line version in English. Some NET's didn't have computer access, so scrap that idea, other's had access but the program would not always work.
I got the very distinct impression that they intended the English classes to fail. Perhaps I am wrong in my assessment, who knows for sure? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
diver
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ontheway wrote: |
In my experience, as a group, the teachers without credentials are actually better at teaching. |
Finally, someone with some experience. Maybe you can help me. I have to do a one hour class (50 minutes) on the first conditional. I was wondering if you could sketch an outline of how you would teach that class. Thanks  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ontheway wrote: |
[q
Exactly.
In fact, no one has presented any evidence that teachers with "credentials," which means a variety of degrees and certificates for a few hours of class, are any better at teaching and obtaining results in the classroom than teachers without such credentials.
In my experience, as a group, the teachers without credentials are actually better at teaching. |
One wonders why then that back in the West you must have "credentials" to actually teach.
And as regards your experience how were you able to determine "the teachers without credentials are actually better at teaching." You conducted experiments with one group of teachers without and another group with credentials? And then followed up on the students' long term results? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
silkhighway
Joined: 24 Oct 2010
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 9:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bruce W Sims wrote: |
| silkhighway wrote: |
| Bruce W Sims wrote: |
Perhaps I am drawing the wrong conclusions from these various posts, but the message seems to be that instructors are being hired to produce an effect and not necessarily a result. As always YMMV.
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
Yes, in the case of public schools, NETs are hired to produce an effect, not a result, which is why they're not and never were considered a longterm solution. |
Ok, then....at least thats honest and something I can get my head around. But it does beg a question that I have had scratching around in the back of my head ever since I first started contributing here. That question is:
If no actual result was intended or will probably be accomplished why the game?
What I mean is that if all people are looking for is essentially childcare workers, why not simply advertize for "childcare workers"? Why all of this mumbo-jumbo about Master's degrees, experience/no experience, Korean literate/non-Korean literate, teacher's cert/no teacher's cert etc etc etc. In my own case I'm not interested in baby-sitting and it would have saved me about a year of heavy soul-searching with my family and a singuarly obnoxious paper-chase if someone would have been up-front and stated that child-care (albeit by another name) is all these places are seeking. A cute nanny whose backside --- er --- background includes being a native speaker of English would seem to pretty much cover this market, wouldn't you think?
Know what I mean? Whats the deal?
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
I don't think they advertise they're looking for child-care workers because they're not looking for child-care advertisers.
Call me crazy here but it seems they're looking for exactly what they're advertising..reasonably educated native English speaking adults with respectable backgrounds (ie no criminal record) to provide authentic English immersion to their students and staff. It seems to me it's people doing the job who want to make it into something it isn't, rather than the employer demanding more of them than they should expect. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Julius
Joined: 27 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| some waygug-in wrote: |
| I got the very distinct impression that they intended the English classes to fail. Perhaps I am wrong in my assessment, who knows for sure? |
KT's did their best to collapse the english programme and then blame the FT's. From day one they saw FT's as the enemy, a threat to their jobs.
It is only really in Korea that such visceral anti-foreignerism regularly makes its way into government policy. But then that is because they only ever consider their own opinion.
Japan and Taiwan are still happily employing FT's in their schools. But then again they are organised, and their management style is more inclusive.
Another main reason for the GEPIK/EPIK failure is the top-down korean style of management (that is the same as in hogwons). It goes something like this:
"Even though I have never taught a class or managed a school in my life before, I am the boss. Its my way or the highway, and there will be no compromise. I'm not even going to listen to your viewpoint and if you express yourself via official channels it will be not only be selectively interpreted by the KT, but also viewed as insubordination, for which we will later find a way to punish you. You have no voice, no rights , not even to a day off when you are sick. We own you. You may have lots of experience and good ideas but we will either prevent you from using them because you are foreign and of no account, or if you do use them we will copy them and pretend that they are ours." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce W Sims
Joined: 08 Mar 2011
Location: Illinois; USA
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 4:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| silkhighway wrote: |
| Bruce W Sims wrote: |
| silkhighway wrote: |
| Bruce W Sims wrote: |
Perhaps I am drawing the wrong conclusions from these various posts, but the message seems to be that instructors are being hired to produce an effect and not necessarily a result. As always YMMV.
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
Yes, in the case of public schools, NETs are hired to produce an effect, not a result, which is why they're not and never were considered a longterm solution. |
Ok, then....at least thats honest and something I can get my head around. But it does beg a question that I have had scratching around in the back of my head ever since I first started contributing here. That question is:
If no actual result was intended or will probably be accomplished why the game?
What I mean is that if all people are looking for is essentially childcare workers, why not simply advertize for "childcare workers"? Why all of this mumbo-jumbo about Master's degrees, experience/no experience, Korean literate/non-Korean literate, teacher's cert/no teacher's cert etc etc etc. In my own case I'm not interested in baby-sitting and it would have saved me about a year of heavy soul-searching with my family and a singuarly obnoxious paper-chase if someone would have been up-front and stated that child-care (albeit by another name) is all these places are seeking. A cute nanny whose backside --- er --- background includes being a native speaker of English would seem to pretty much cover this market, wouldn't you think?
Know what I mean? Whats the deal?
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
I don't think they advertise they're looking for child-care workers because they're not looking for child-care advertisers.
Call me crazy here but it seems they're looking for exactly what they're advertising..reasonably educated native English speaking adults with respectable backgrounds (ie no criminal record) to provide authentic English immersion to their students and staff. It seems to me it's people doing the job who want to make it into something it isn't, rather than the employer demanding more of them than they should expect. |
Excuse me, as maybe you are seeing something that I am not. However, I can rundown the list of various threads and there are a majority of posts that repeat the theme that there are people coming to Korea who are not particularly suited to being hired as a teacher, yet they get hired. There are people reporting that they want to teach and are being hampered by co-teachers, co-workers, administration and materials. There are people who are reporting that government agencies are conflicted over what approach and outcome is desired. Call me crazy, but this all seems to very much fly in the face of what is being advertised.
If a recruiting firm or institution advertises that they are seeking a Teacher with a MA and experience, a reasonable person would conclude that a person with a MA and experience will be hired to Teach, yes? This is not the message that is coming across on these boards, intended or not.
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
silkhighway
Joined: 24 Oct 2010
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 6:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bruce W Sims wrote: |
If a recruiting firm or institution advertises that they are seeking a Teacher with a MA and experience, a reasonable person would conclude that a person with a MA and experience will be hired to Teach, yes? This is not the message that is coming across on these boards, intended or not.
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
Sure, I have a feeling we're talking about different jobs here though. There are lots of positions in Korea that demand an MA I'm sure, they're just not in the public schools or hagwons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
diver
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 6:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| diver wrote: |
| Finally, someone with some experience. Maybe you can help me. I have to do a one hour class (50 minutes) on the first conditional. I was wondering if you could sketch an outline of how you would teach that class. Thanks |
Yeah...that's what I thought. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce W Sims
Joined: 08 Mar 2011
Location: Illinois; USA
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 6:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| silkhighway wrote: |
| Bruce W Sims wrote: |
If a recruiting firm or institution advertises that they are seeking a Teacher with a MA and experience, a reasonable person would conclude that a person with a MA and experience will be hired to Teach, yes? This is not the message that is coming across on these boards, intended or not.
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
Sure, I have a feeling we're talking about different jobs here though. There are lots of positions in Korea that demand an MA I'm sure, they're just not in the public schools or hagwons. |
Mmmmmm.....I'm not so sure. Here on Daves the job list speaks for itself.
Now bump those advertised requirements and positions up against what people are reporting on a regular basis and there is a very clear discrepancy about what is being asked for and how those qualifications are being used.
Consider this. How many Kindergarten "teaching" positions have you seen that asked for a BA? Now of those, how many asked for scholarship specifically in Child Development?
How about Elementary Schools? These ask for BA-s as well. How many ask for a specific focus on Elementary School Education, Childhood Assessment or Developmental Psychology.
Or how about this. The main thrust of these positions is to Teach English as a second language, yes? How many of the hundreds of positions actually ask for experience and education in this specific field and then avail themselves of that person's expertise?
Yes.... you are right. There are a LOT of positions asking for MA-s but at this rate the concentration of MA-s and BA-s ought produce some of the finest ESL teaching in the World and its not.
Is this making sense?
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
silkhighway
Joined: 24 Oct 2010
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 6:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bruce W Sims wrote: |
Is this making sense?
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
Not really. I haven't looked at the job board in awhile. I presume the standard is Bachelors required, No experience necessary. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce W Sims
Joined: 08 Mar 2011
Location: Illinois; USA
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 8:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| silkhighway wrote: |
| Bruce W Sims wrote: |
Is this making sense?
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
Not really. I haven't looked at the job board in awhile. I presume the standard is Bachelors required, No experience necessary. |
Ok.....lets start small, then. Take JUST THAT PIECE there. What is it that one expects an individual to accomplish based on those credentials?
The mention of "no experience" for starters. Is that "no ESL experience"? Is that no work experience"? Is that "no teaching experience"? What can be reasonably expected of someone with "no experience"?
The mention is made of "Bachelors required". Not a Bachelors in Education, Linguistics or a Bachelors in ESL. Not a Bachelors in Corporate Training or Child Development. In fact it could be a degree in anything, right?
The advertisements are consistently for "teachers". What kind of teaching is accomplished with no teaching credentials or preparation?
Thoughts?
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
silkhighway
Joined: 24 Oct 2010
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bruce W Sims wrote: |
| silkhighway wrote: |
| Bruce W Sims wrote: |
Is this making sense?
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
Not really. I haven't looked at the job board in awhile. I presume the standard is Bachelors required, No experience necessary. |
Ok.....lets start small, then. Take JUST THAT PIECE there. What is it that one expects an individual to accomplish based on those credentials?
|
Plan English lessons. Give students exposure to educated native English speakers. Be a role model.
| Quote: |
The mention of "no experience" for starters. Is that "no ESL experience"? Is that no work experience"? Is that "no teaching experience"? What can be reasonably expected of someone with "no experience"?
|
That they are willing to learn what they need to do.
| Quote: |
The mention is made of "Bachelors required". Not a Bachelors in Education, Linguistics or a Bachelors in ESL. Not a Bachelors in Corporate Training or Child Development. In fact it could be a degree in anything, right?
|
Yes, for reasons we've gone over several times now.
| Quote: |
The advertisements are consistently for "teachers". What kind of teaching is accomplished with no teaching credentials or preparation?
Thoughts?
|
Teachers come in many forms. You don't need to be a lifelong dedicated educator to be a teacher. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce W Sims
Joined: 08 Mar 2011
Location: Illinois; USA
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| silkhighway wrote: |
Plan English lessons. Give students exposure to educated native English speakers. Be a role model.
That they are willing to learn what they need to do.
Yes, for reasons we've gone over several times now.
Teachers come in many forms. You don't need to be a lifelong dedicated educator to be a teacher. |
Thank you very much for neatly making my point.
There is a clear difference between "teachers" and "teacher-like behavior". Individuals such as myself are teachers & educators and, as in my own case, have dedicated a life-time to this. What you are characterizing is "teacher-like behavior". And, you are very right....you DON'T need a degree to be a role model. But then, don't advertise for teachers because you will actually get responses from teachers who think---BION--- that you really really want TEACHERS!
Go figure. What could they possibly have been thinking? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
liveinkorea316
Joined: 20 Aug 2010
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think you have to be a career teacher nor do you need to have an education qualification to be called a teacher.
Teacher is a job and activity, not a type of person.
Most Christians consider Jesus to have been a teacher. I am pretty sure he never attended college.
One of the most important parts of being a teacher is to know your subject area very well.
Having said that, there are good and bad teachers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
